Originally Posted by cmbdiesel

Why? If enough people wish to amend the 2nd, (that is part of the system) then the rest should be American enough to accept that change.

Hardline comments like yours provide nothing.

BTW, I voted no, mostly because I did not like the way #3 was worded. The 2nd does not need to be rewritten, it needs amending. The original language should not be tampered with, but clarification outlining what is acceptable to the people at this juncture in time should be added. Obviously, the firearm has evolved incredibly since the adoption of COTUS, and the 2nd should be amended to reflect those changes. It is supposed to be a living document, not a stale old piece of paper with no relevance to the modern world.

Certainly, I believe that any attempts to alter/interpret the 2nd should be done with amendment rather than legislation. It is a far higher bar, and I believe much more representative of the will of the people.
Congress has gotten awfully eager to repress the rights afforded to us under COTUS, and I don't believe there are many people who like that tendency.
If they want to directly impact our rights under COTUS, then they should be using the amendment procedures outlined in article 5, not doing end around legislation.